A review into the effectiveness of vetting in Lancashire police found that applicants from ethnic minority groups and those who are Muslim are generally more likely to be refused vetting clearance.

However, this was because applicants had not filled in forms correctly, a report from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) stated.

HMICFRS independently assesses the effectiveness and efficiency of police forces and fire and rescue services, in the public interest, and following a September 2022 review into the effectiveness of vetting and counter-corruption arrangements, Lancashire Constabulary was rated ‘good’ overall.

A report from the HMICFRS stated: “The force analyses its vetting decisions to identify potential disproportionality. The analysis shows that applicants from ethnic minority groups and those who are Muslim are generally more likely to be refused vetting clearance compared to applicants from white backgrounds, or those who are Christian.

“When the force reviewed the reasons for refusal, it identified that these applicants often failed because they didn’t disclose relevant information about friends and family.

“To address this, the force has prepared guidance for applicants including a video and a leaflet containing hints and tips for completing the form.

“These are used by the recruitment department and vetting officers during sessions with potential applicants from ethnic minority groups.

“It is too early to assess how effective these measures will be in addressing the disproportionality.”

The force told inspectors that as of September 2022, it had a total of 6,309 police officers, special constables, police staff and police community support officers.

The force said there were however, 56 people (30 police officers, 24 police staff and two police community support officers) in post without the correct level of vetting because it had expired. The force demonstrated awareness of these cases and had already sent reminders.

A review of 40 vetting clearance decisions from the preceding three years was carried out with a vetting specialist from another force. These files related to police officers and staff who had previously committed criminal offences or those that the force had other concerns about. The case file review included transferee and recruitment vetting decisions.

The report added: “We agreed with almost all the force’s vetting clearance decisions. The decisions were well documented with suitably detailed rationale in all but one case.”